Updated: Tolland Council Trims Next Year's Budget Proposal

Updated Friday, May 6:

With five members present, the Town Council unanimously voted to send a $50.75 million budget to referendum on May 17; two members did not attend the special meeting held Thursday night in the council chambers.

Council members did not make any further adjustments to the budget beyond what was agreed upon during its meeting Wednesday. At that time, they chose to take $230,000 from the school budget. They also reduced the capital budget by $33,000 by deferring maintenance on a skylight at the intermediate school and applying some of the $133,000 in anticipated state property tax relief revenue to cover the cost of a municipal drainage project.

In total, the revised budget - the original plan was defeated at referendum on May 3 - is 2.9 percent more than the current year and would require a 0.84 mill increase in the tax rate to 29.99 mills.

The budget breakdown is as follows:

• Town Government, $10,818,258
• Board of Education, $34,906,107
• Debt Service, $4,751,796
• Capital, $276,501

One final adjustment made does not have an effect on the budget, but was done after a Council Member Dale Clayton said he objected to its original format. The engineer/technician position that would have served the needs of the Water Pollution Control Authority was removed and replaced with an option to use contracted services. Either option would have been paid for from the use fees collected, not from the general fund.

Original story from Thursday, May 5:

A day after voters rejected a proposed town budget of $51.04 million for next year, town council members took out the scissors in hopes of styling a spending plan more to taxpayers’ liking.

In the end, the seven council members agreed on an overall spending proposal of $50.75 million that will be presented to voters in a second day-long referendum that will be held on May 17. The final numbers of the new package, including a revised property tax rate, won’t be settled until some time today and voted on by the council tonight at 7:30 during a special meeting.

Under the revised proposal, town government spending would remain unchanged at $10,818,258; the board of education’s budget would be reduced by $230,000 to $34,906,107, debt service would remain at $4,751,796 and a capital projects budget of $276,501.

In Tuesday’s referendum, voter’s said no to a proposed 2011-12 budget of $51,041,662 by a 367 vote margin; 1,500 yes to 1,867 no. Though there were no advisory questions on the ballot that asked those unhappy with the proposal whether they considered it too high or too low, town council members interpreted the budget’s defeat as meaning the majority wanted it reduced.

So that’s what they did.

The seven-member council’s Democratic majority of five arrived that the meeting fresh from a party caucus with revisions that included a $200,000 cut from the school board’s budget. That figure was offset by $85,000 in savings that resulted from 49 school system employees agreeing to participate in the lower-cost, health savings account health insurance program.

The council’s goal Wednesday was to fashion a budget that could be supported by a 29.99 mill tax rate paid by local property owners. At that rate, a property owner would owe the town $2,999 in taxes on each $100,000 in assessed property value.

That had been the rate that Town Manager Steven Werbner recommended to the council when he presented his budget proposal to the town council earlier this spring. It was, however, a figure attainable only if teachers and school administrators agreed to join the high-deductable health saving insurance plan. When the school board complained Werbner’s estimate of the cost savings that could be achieved if its employees switched to a HSA plan, the council backed off the suggestion.

The budget proposal that voters rejected on Tuesday carried the stamp of approval of only the five council Democrats. Republicans April Teveris and Dale Clayton had voted against it, in part, because it would have increased town spending by $1.72 million and increased the property tax rate by 34.9 percent to 30.28 mills.

Clayton on Wednesday was set to just-say-no to the revised proposal because it contained an engineer/technician position that would serve the needs of the water pollution control authority and the water commission. Now is not the time to be expanding town government, Clayton said, adding that if the authority and commission want to hire extra help the money should come from those budgets.

“If they want to hire a contractor let them do it,” Clayton said, adding that he is leaning toward voting no “on principle” tonight when the actual vote that will send the budget to its second referendum May 17.

That didn’t sit well with council Chairman Frederick Daniels who said he had been hoping for a consensus on the budget from all seven council members.

“I would like to say we support the budget as a full council,” Daniels said.

One new position that both sides agreed was needed was that of assistant public safety supervisor to take some of the pressure off the town’s public safety supervisor Fire Chief John Littell who regularly works in excess of 70 hours a week. Littell and other members of the town’s public safety division were at Wednesday’s meeting.

Council members kicked about the idea of delaying the assistant public safety supervisor’s hiring until Jan. 1 to save roughly $15,000 in salary and benefits but finally settled on Oct. 1 as the start date. That is if taxpayers approve this budget on May 17.